I have also gone through my fair share of "serious" compacts, like the ones mentioned above. All have their strenghts and weaknesses, but I am at a point where I have given up. I had high hopes for the DP1, but really, albeit the high image quality for general landscape/travel photography (of which I do some), the clumsy interface/poor LCD/slow technology was a real letdown. I had hopes that the DP1 would combine the present day available handling/ergonomics, with better image quality from its larger sensor. Unfortunately, albeit being a step in the right direction, it is not there yet.
All the others, are a combination of useful and frustating aspects simultaneously. Even the touted Fujis have succumbed to the pixel race. And for instance, the latest F100fd has dropped aperture and shutter priority modes. Why? Of course, it now has 12 Mpixels...
The new Panasonic FX500 is compact and has the above mentioned modes, but it combines it with a touching LCD interface... why can't we have just a solid little camera a la DP1, but with the useful technology that is already available today? I just don't get it. For example, Canon puts 28mm focal range in the Ixus series, but not in the upper series compacts.
It seems that we have too many brands actually, and they are just going around this business a bit like headless chickes, trying to suck the profit while it lasts. By now, for sure the compact camera market has to be saturated, so why models every 6 months? Just give us serious shooters a serious little camera; I want a digital compact that performs like the Contax T2/T3, Leica CM, Rollei AFM35, and the like.